Open main menu

Commons:秀逸な画像の推薦

概要Edit

推薦にあたってEdit

推薦者のためのガイドラインEdit

まずはじめに、『秀逸な画像ガイドライン』、『画像のガイドライン』をお読みください。

ここでは推薦画像の評価を受ける・する際の必要事項を要約して紹介します。

  • 解像度 - 200万ピクセル以下の写真画像は、特別な理由が無い限り却下されます。1,600 x 1,200 ピクセル(1.92メガピクセル)は200万ピクセルには届いていない事にご注意ください。
コモンズに置かれた画像は一般的なPCモニターのみで閲覧されるとは限らず、プリントアウトや高解像度モニターで表示される可能性もあります。将来的にもどのような機器が用いられるようになるかは誰にも予想出来ないので、推薦画像が可能な限り高い解像度を保っている事は重要な事なのです。
  • スキャン画像 - 公式な方針ではありませんが、Help:スキャニングページで各種様々な画像を準備するための有用なアドバイスが提供されています。
  • フォーカス - 通常、重要な被写体は全て焦点が合っていなければいけません。
  • 前景と背景 - 前景や背景に主題ではない物が写り込むと、それは“余計なもの”になり得ます。前景にある物が主題の重要な部分を隠していないか、背景にあるものが構図を損ねていないか(例:後ろの街灯が人物の頭の上から生えているように見える、等)を確認しましょう。
  • 全体品質 - 推薦される画像には高い技術品質が要求されます。
  • デジタル補正 - 見る人を欺いてはいけません。写真画像のキズ・ホコリ等を修正する、良い編集、故意に人を騙す目的でない限り、デジタル補正は一般的に歓迎されます。例を挙げると、色合い/露出補正、シャープ/ボカシ、遠近感歪み補正、トリミング(切り取り)等がこれにあたります。背景に写り込んだ余計な物を取り除く等のさらに大がかりな修正は、{{Retouched picture}}テンプレートを画像ページへ貼付け、修正した旨を記述しましょう。記述漏れや記述ミスがある等、主題を不正確に見せる編集は決して受け入れられません。
  • 価値 - 『全ての画像の中でも特に際立ち、最も価値のある画像』が我々の大きな目標です。秀逸な画像はそれぞれの分野の中でも別格でなけらばならず、故に次の点に留意して下さい。
    • たいていの夕日は美しく見えますが、そういう画像のほとんどは他の夕日画像と大差ありません。
    • 夜景は美しいですが、普通は日中に撮影された写真の方がより詳細を見せてくれます。
    • 必ずしも『美しさに価値がある』わけではありません。

技術的側面では露出『構図』『動感表現』被写界深度等を見ます。

  • 露出とはシャッタースピードと絞りとの組み合わせの事を言い、適切なトーンカーブが見せる陰影〜ハイライトが有用なディティールを描写します。これをラティチュード(露光寛容度)と言い、このラティチュードの陰影〜ハイライトの領域内において、画像を暗め、中庸、明るめに作る事が出来ますが、デジタルカメラ及びデジタル画像はこのラティチュードの範囲がフィルムに比べて狭いです。ディティールの欠損した影部分は必ずしも「悪い」わけではなく、実際にその様な効果が望ましい場合(部分)もあります。ただしディティールの欠損したハイライト部分が大きく面積を占めるのは良くありません。
  • 構図とは画像画面内での各要素の配置の事を言います。“三分割法”は構図作成には良い方法で、美術学校でも教えられています。まず、画像に水平線と垂直線をそれぞれ2本引き、画像を水平・垂直方向とも3分割します。主題を中央に配置するとたいていは画面に面白味を欠き、水平線と垂直線が交差する4つの交点の内どれか1つに主題を置いた方が良い画面になるでしょう。地平線は画面を半分に切ってしまうので、通常は地平線を中央に配置するべきではありません。上寄り、若しくは下寄りに配置させる方が良いでしょう。主たる考え方としては空間を上手に使い、躍動感・臨場感のある画面を作るという事です。
  • 動感表現 - ここでは被写体の「動き」を表現する手法を紹介します。動きのある被写体は止まって見えるか、もしくはブレて写りますが、これらはどちらの方が良いとは必ずしも言えず、どのような表現意図を持っているかによります。「動感」は主題と共に写り込んでいる他の背景等との関係で表現されます。例えばレーシングカーの撮影。車と背景とが共に止まって見えては、見る側にスピード感は伝わってきません。 なので撮影手法によって車は画面内で止まっているように写り、かつ背景をブレさせることでスピード感が表現され、このような手法を「パンニング(流し撮り)」と呼びます。一方で、背景と共に止まって撮られた高く跳躍したバスケットボール選手は、これは決定的瞬間の「不自然」なポーズになり、これも良い写真になり得るでしょう。
  • 被写界深度(DOF)とは主題の前側から後ろ側までのフォーカスエリアの事を言います。被写界深度は全ての画像で明解な意図のもと選択され、深い、または浅い被写界深度は、画像に品質を与えもし、また損なわせもします。浅い被写界深度は、主題を他の被写体から切り離し、見せたい被写体に注目を集めることが出来ます。深い被写界深度は空間を強調させる事が出来ます。広角(短焦点)レンズは深い被写界深度、逆に望遠(長焦点)レンズは浅い被写界深度が得られる傾向があります。また絞りを絞り込むと被写界深度は深く、解放すると浅い被写界深度が得られます。

グラフィック要素では形状、ボリューム、色、テクスチャー、遠近感、バランス、比率 等を見ます。

  • 形状とは主題に対する輪郭線、及び形状を言います。
  • ボリュームとは主題の立体感に対する品質を言います。立体感は横からのライティングで表現出来、反対に正面からのライティングは被写体を平坦に見せる傾向があり、不向きとされています。自然光の中でベストな光を得るには、早朝か、もしくは夕方の日の光が良いでしょう。
  • は大変重要で、強すぎる色合いは好ましくありません。
  • テクスチャーとは主題の表面材質の描写性に於ける品質を言います。表面材質は横からのライティングにより強調され、手に触れて伝わるかのような質感を与えます。
  • 遠近感とは、画像の画面内若しくは外にある消失点で繋がる放射状の直線、これに沿った形で現れる「角度」により表現されます。
  • バランスでは画像の画面内での重心が左右均衡か、若しくは片方に寄る等適切な配置が成されているかを見ます。
  • 比率では画面の大きさに対する被写体の大きさを見ます。一般的に、小さな被写体は小さく写真に表現してしまう傾向にありますが、相応しい撮影手法により小さな被写体を実寸とは逆に大きく見せる事が可能です。例えば、小さな花を大きな山よりも大きく見る事が出来ます。この手法を指して「倒置法」と呼びます。
主題の全ての要素を画像に盛込む必要はありません。多くの写真はそれぞれの個性で評価出来ます。すなわち、画像の色やテクスチャー等々により判断出来ます。
  • 『象徴性か妥当性か』 ー 『秀逸な画像』ではしばしばこのようなテーマで意見論争が起こる傾向にあります。技術的・品質的には出来の悪い写真でも極めて撮影困難な被写体を捉えた写真は、凡庸な被写体を写した品質的に良い写真よりも評価されます。もちろん撮影困難な被写体を写し、かつ品質も良い写真は極めて価値の高い写真と言えます。
画像は時に撮影者と評価者、若しくはどちらか片方の文化的な偏りが見られます。画像の意図は画像そのものの文化的背景により評価されるべきであり、評価者の文化的背景に依存してはいけません。イメージは人に語りかけ、そして慈しみ、怒り、拒絶、幸せ、悲しみ等の感情を喚起させる力を持っています。良い写真から与えられる心地よさには限りがありません。


画像のガイドラインを事前に読めば、あなたの推薦が成就する可能性を最大限に引き伸ばしてくれるでしょう。

新規推薦Edit

推薦に値する価値があると考えられる画像を作った、または見つけたならば、その画像に適切な説明ライセンスが与えられているかを確認し、以下に従ってください。

ステップ1:画像名(接頭Image:を含む)を下のテキストボックス内の文字列の後にコピー&ペースト、正しく Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:推薦画像名.jpg と記入されているかを確認し、続いて『作品を推薦』ボタンをクリックします。


ステップ2:ページ編集画面上にある指示に従い必要箇所を付記、ページを保存してください。

ステップ3:ステップ2で作成したページへのリンクをFeatured picture candidates/candidate listへ手動で挿入します。ページ編集をクリックし、候補リスト最上部に以下の書式で推薦画像へのリンクを加えます。

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:推薦画像名.jpg}}

投票Edit

投票には以下のテンプレートを使用します:

  • {{支持}}または{{Support}} (  Support  Support),
  • {{反対}}または{{Oppose}} (  Oppose  Oppose),
  • {{中立}}または{{Neutral}} (  Neutral  Neutral),
  • {{コメント}}または{{Comment}} (  Comment  Comment),
  • 情報:{{Info}} (  Info),
  • 質問:{{Question}} (  Question).

テンプレート{{FPX|理由}}を用いて、推薦画像が秀逸な画像の推薦に相応しくない旨を指摘出来ます。テンプレートの「理由」部分に、秀逸な画像には明確に値しない事の説明を書き加えます(可能ならば英語で)。

あなたが何故その画像を好むか、または好まないか、特に(  Supportや(  Opposeの投票をする際は簡単な理由を加えましょう。また署名(~~~~)も忘れずに。匿名投票は受け付けられません。

秀逸な画像からの除外Edit

時も経ればやがて『秀逸な画像』の基準も変わります。かつては“充分に価値に値する”と決定されたであろう画像も、その価値は普遍ではありません。ここでは「もはや『秀逸な画像』に値しない」と考えられる画像をリストアップします。リストされた画像へは、{{Keep}}   Keep 及び {{維持}}   Keep (=『秀逸な画像』に値する)、または{{Delist}}   Delist 及び {{除外}}   Oppose (=『秀逸な画像』に値しない)を投票します。

あなたが『秀逸な画像』の価値基準に値しないと考える画像があれば、除外候補として提出できます。除外したい画像の画像名(接頭Image:を含む)を下のテキストボックスの文字列の後にコピー&ペーストします。


あなたが作成した新規除外候補のページに以下を加えます。

  • 画像の作者、投稿者等の出所情報。
  • その画像の“過去の秀逸な画像への推薦”ページへのリンク(画像ページの「リンク節」に表示されています)。
  • あなたが除外と考える理由とあなたの署名。

次に、Commons:Featured picture candidates/removalを編集し、下記の書式で作成した除外候補のページのリンクを手動で最上段に挿入します。

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:除外画像名.jpg}}

秀逸な画像の候補での方針Edit

総則Edit

  1. 投票期間を終えた後、結果は推薦日時から数えて10日後(下記タイムテーブル参照)に決定します。投票期間は推薦日時から数えて9日と23時間59分です。10日、またはそれを超えた投票はカウントされません。
  2. 匿名寄稿者による推薦を歓迎します。
  3. 匿名寄稿者による議論への参加を歓迎します。
  4. 匿名寄稿者による投票はカウントされません。
  5. 推薦者票は投票へはカウントされません。支持は明示的かつ言明される必要があります。
  6. 推薦者は自身の推薦をいつでも取り下げる事が出来ます。推薦を取り下げるには "I withdraw my nomination" (推薦を取り下げます)と書くか、テンプレート {{withdraw|~~~~}} を加えます。
  7. ウィキメディア・コモンズのプロジェクトの目的は、全てのウィキメディアプロジェクト(将来的なプロジェクト含む)に於いて自由に利用可能な画像を集積するセントラル・データベースを提供することである、ということを忘れないでください。セントラル・データベースは単純にウィキメディアの保管庫と言うわけではなく、また『秀逸な画像』等のプロジェクトに応じた判断をされるべきではありません。
  8. 推薦日から数えて5日間支持を受けられなかった画像(推薦者票含まず)は候補リストから外されます。(下記タイムテーブル参照)
  9. テンプレート{{FPX}}が貼られた画像は、テンプレート{{FPX}}の適用後は推薦者以外の支持票が無い限り、48時間後に候補リストから外されます。

秀逸と除外のルールEdit

候補画像は下記必要事項に準じて秀逸な画像に認定されます。

  1. 適切なライセンス情報が添付されている。
  2. 最低5票以上の支持票を得ている。
  3. 支持:反対比率が2:1 (賛成が3分の2の過半数)以上である。
  4. 2つの同様な画像での異なったバージョンは同時に『秀逸な画像』へは認定されず、より支持票の多かった一枚を認定します。

除外ルールでは、投票期間、及びリストから外される期間は秀逸ルールと同じ期間を取ります。除外候補提出後5日間で提出者以外の   Delist   Oppose)票が得られなかった候補は、5日間ルールが適用され、候補リストから外されます。

常連ユーザーが推薦・投票の完了方法に従って、推薦投票を閉じることがあります。終了方法に関してはCommons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finishedを参照。

何よりも礼儀を忘れずにEdit

どうか、あなたが評価するその画像が「人の作品」であることを忘れないでください。「これはヒドイ」、「こんなのキライだ」と言ったような表現は避けましょう。もしあなたが『反対』に票を投じなければならないのなら、思いやりを忘れずに。また、あなたの話す英語は、また誰か他の人の話す英語とは同じではないでしょう。慎重に言葉を選んでください。

それでは良い評価を。そして、全てのルールは壊すことが出来るという事を忘れないでください。

関連項目Edit

目次Edit

Contents

秀逸な画像の候補Edit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:2018 - Château fort de Lourdes.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 09:23:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Exterior of the Castle of Valencay 31.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 07:07:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Close up of Maitreya Buddha at Thiksey Monastery DSCN6617 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 06:55:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Ice planet and antarctic jellyfish.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 00:29:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals#Class_:_Scyphozoa
  •   Info Diplulmaris antarctica jellyfish in Antarctica. One of the finalists in the Wiki Science Competition 2017. Created and uploaded by AMICE - nominated by Rhododendrites. — Rhododendrites talk |  00:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The detail on the jellyfish itself is nice, and I like the way the light field frames it. The filename should probably be moved away from "ice planet" since it's, well, technically inaccurate :) but that's sort of what it looks like. — Rhododendrites talk |  00:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Nice animal, but distracting blue light in the background, and I find the crop too large. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:33, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Physocarpus opulifolius.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 00:16:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Rialto Bridge at night2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 17:11:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support - Quite good. "Rialto bridge at night" is a sufficient description. As for geotagging, someone could do that, but we know where the Rialto Bridge is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Buste Hervé de Portzmoguer.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 16:50:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info Bust of the Breton sailor Hervé de Portzmoguer. He is known under the name of Primauget for having commanded the fleet during the battle of Saint-Mathieu. created by S. DÉNIEL - uploaded by S. DÉNIEL - nominated by S. DÉNIEL -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Technically 3200 ISO is far too noisy for this kind of static shot. The picture is not sharp. In low light a tripod is necessary -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
    • The tripod is forbidden in most museums. With these principles you limit diversity. What is the ISO limit number for a photo to be acceptable? --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 06:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Most photos simply can't be FPs. FPs are supposed to be among the very best photos on the site. Have you looked at COM:VIC? Even museum photos that are not great can be valuable, and if they're best in a particular scope that's deemed sufficiently notable (such as this sculpture probably would be), they can get the Valued Image designation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for these tips. What is the ISO limit number for a photo to be acceptable for you? --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 08:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I think it completely depends on the subject and the type of photography. Here some people will find your picture noisy at 125 ISO only because of their lack of enthusiasm for your subject, and sometimes they will forgive 1600 ISO or more since the situation is special, justified by some features (moving subject in a dark place, telephoto, etc.) -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile, might not be a QI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Teddy-Express.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 15:25:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question Absolutely charming :), but is there any chance of getting just a little bit more frame at the top? Just enough to get the top left little train signal not cut. I think that would also balance the photo better because of the empty space at the bottom between the tracks. Thoughts? --Cart (talk) 16:12, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
    •   Done --Llez (talk) 22:02, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Great, thanks. With the amount of guys here on this forum, I'm surprised we don't have any FP's of model trains (AFAICS). Think of the challenge to make it appear like a real train in a Kabelleger-esque photo. --Cart (talk) 22:47, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:29, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:De Lelie and De Ster view from Island.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 14:26:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:ISS-43 Deploying of CubeSats.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 13:50:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Space exploration#Spacecraft in orbit
  •   Info created by NASA - uploaded by Ras67 - nominated by Msaynevirta -- Msaynevirta (talk) 13:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Msaynevirta (talk) 13:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It's a 'no' from me for two reasons: firstly, I'm not really wowed by what I'm looking at; the subject is not very clear, certainly nowhere near some of the other impressive shots from NASA; shots of planets, stars and such. Secondly, the image quality is not FP level - there's a glare coming from the highlights, the sharpness is sub-par and the resolution is not very high either.--Peulle (talk) 16:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 22:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Composition is a bit empty and I'm not impressed by the quality at full size -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:WLE - 2018 - Parc national des Pyrenees - Cirque de Gavarnie - 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 13:30:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France
  •   Info created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Moahim -- Moahim (talk) 13:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Moahim (talk) 13:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support very nice mood --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Martin. Not easy to get a stream centered and still get the "accent subject" at 1/3. --Cart (talk) 16:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportRhododendrites talk |  16:23, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Yes, this is quite beautiful. Is this the full-sized photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:51, 21 September 2018 (UTC) - It is crop from the larger pano (there were a bit of superfluous information), so it has such size --Moahim (talk) 05:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - OK, thank you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:42, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:PushkinGory asv2018-07 img05 Mikhailovskoe.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 12:45:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Javier shows part of the grape harvest in his Lysekil vineyard 1 - cropped.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 00:39:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
  •   Info No, I haven't been out travelling I'm sorry to say. This is from the harvest in a vineyard/winery right up here in the cold north. After having documented the harvest at the vineyard, this photo stuck with me as a more vivid way of presenting the grapes-soon-to-be-wine, in the hands of the farmer himself instead of arranged on a plate or something. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Now for something completely different. :) --Peulle (talk) 07:01, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Composition. Charles (talk) 08:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it. IMO nothing wrong with the composition--A.Savin 12:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:23, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Yes, different. I like the different shades of green. Are the Solaris grapes he's holding similar to Chardonnay? They look similar. Daniel Case (talk) 14:40, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, I'm rather ignorant when it comes to grapes, other than that they and their products are tasty. I only learned that Javier chose Solaris since they are hardy and can survive in this climate. --Cart (talk) 15:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
@W.carter: Yes, that's what the article says, but not its Swedish counterpart yet unfortunately. But both of them do explain how it was bred, and it appears the dark spots are really just a coincidence as there is absolutely no Chardonnay in their ancestry. Daniel Case (talk) 02:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Composition! How long did it take you to move the farmers fingers to the right direction that they started to make a pleasing form? Also, any other colour of the farmer's T-shirt would spoil it but it seems like he was carefully choosing the right green gradient until he found the right fit for the color of the grass and the grapes. --Podzemnik (talk) 14:51, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You are right on both accounts. :) I did manhandle the poor guy a bit to get the photo as good as I could. The hardest part was getting him in position so that the angle of the light became just right for the grapes. At first he was a bit annoyed with me taking up time from the harvest, but he brightened considerably when he realized he was also getting free photos of his vineyard to use. I was extremely lucky that he had such a fashion sense, any other shirt and the photo would have been ruined. But that is what photography so often is about: luck, the color of a shirt, a cloud or a ray of light in the right place. Things you can't control, only do your darnedest to capture when you see them. --Cart (talk) 15:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportRhododendrites talk |  16:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:07, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Green shirt (and green background), and something different, per Peulle and Podzemnik -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A photo report is good for diversity here. --S. DÉNIEL
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 09:42, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Lužice, zatáčka.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 19:45:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info created by Aktron - uploaded by Aktron - nominated by T.Bednarz -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question - T.Bednarz, would you like to give an explanation of how you find this one of the best photos on Commons? I'm not seeing it, but I'd like to see an argument, if possible, before I vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm not satisfied that the technical quality here is high enough to reach featured status. Also, while the composition is nice enough, I'm not really blown away - there's no big "wow" factor.--Peulle (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not bad as thumbnail but disappointing at full size. Not sharp and there's also chromatic aberration. It would be okay with a better quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:37, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Under the right circumstances this could make a great roadscape. These aren't them. Daniel Case (talk) 14:35, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Félix, Torralba de Ribota, Zaragoza, España, 2018-04-04, DD 51-53 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 18:06:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Juvenile Nubian ibex (50822).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 09:20:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • @Ikan Kekek: It's small because as soon as I got closer, they ran off (I'm clumsier than they are in a rocky desert), and that's the longest focal length I had/have available to me (150mm, equivalent to 300mm full frame). — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Yes, very small and the lighting not so good. A bit soft. 1/1600 sec/F5.6 not a good choice for a static scene. Charles (talk) 11:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • If it were a situation when I could've used a tripod vs. freehandling at 150mm (equivalent to 300mm full frame) on rocky ground, I'd agree re: shutter. Perhaps I could've brought it down a little bit from 1/1600 and still be safe, but it was just shortly before I left the desert and the only time I saw kids together like this, nevermind close enough to photograph, so wanted to be safe because there was no shortage of light and they were just so cute :). Maybe a noob move, meh. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not all all 'Noob'. But only a few images aspire to FP! Charles (talk) 16:46, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose For me there's no to ways about it; it's not an FP for the reasons stated above.--Peulle (talk) 14:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support overall I was happy with the result of this one, though I understand why some would oppose given the size of it. I do wish I could've gotten closer without scaring them or for different conditions. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Maybe I'm too much of a softy, but although this photo is small, it's well composed and I find it touching. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:14, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support, lighting isn't all that special and a little bokeh would be good, but I guess under the circumstances presented above this was the best shot possible. Good composition as well. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Moderate support It's not the greatest it could be. But it doesn't have too many too obvious shortcomings for a picture by someone who doesn't usually take wildlife photos and just tried to make the best of a shot that presented itself and was unlikely to last. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 17:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Streitberg Freibad 7023683.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 06:27:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • User:Ermell, what do you think? Is it oversaturated? I figured that that's how it actually looked, because of the light at that time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Ikan and Cart are right, saturation was not added. I just changed the profile to Adobe strong. After bathing and just before sunset, the light and colours were essentially the same as they are shown here. Thanks for nominating Ikan.--Ermell (talk) 20:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You're welcome. I think it's an interesting shot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't know, only a bad perception. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Looking at a lawn in a photo is usually a good way of judging if it is oversaturated. The grass here is almost dull (compaired to the church nom below) so I don't see any signs of oversaturation. --Cart (talk) 09:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You have seen this church: so, you know, saturation (in general) is not necessarily a problem for me. it's just a comment. What is your opinion, you voting for?--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • On this forum. we can make observations and comments without voting. --Cart (talk) 13:20, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it. :) The combination of strong red and blue colours with intermittent whites, the composition with the mirror effect and the general curves of the subject are enough for me to overlook any smaller issues with depth, noise or saturation. I also think it's quite cool how the divider in the water is also red and white.--Peulle (talk) 14:12, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support I like it, but I think it would be even stronger cropped to the slides. However, that might make it too small for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Ermell (talk) 20:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:21, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - The colors make me think of a real-life David Hockney painting — Rhododendrites talk |  16:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:31, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Lincoln Cathedral Chapter House.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 12:22:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Dülmen, Privatrösterei Schröer, Kaffeebehälter -- 2018 -- 0529.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 10:31:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others_2
  •   Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 10:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- XRay talk 10:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I know it's an effect, but I feel like the DoF is a bit too shallow here; even the closest container is not entirely in focus.--Peulle (talk) 11:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 03:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Current DoF works for me. --Rbrechko (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Works for me too. --Cart (talk) 07:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 14:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice colors and composition, and per Rbrechko. It reminds me this -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Musée L during civil twilight (Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, DSCF4200).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 23:32:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Belgium
  •   Info "It has so many pretty lines everywhere! And I feel like it evokes a story with the lights and the things poking through the windows. :)" - User:Bubblenymph, by User:Trougnouf
  •   Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 23:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose lighting does not appeal. Charles (talk) 08:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Charles --Milseburg (talk) 13:34, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Charles; just doesn't stand out for me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Cool lines and soft light :) - Benh (talk) 21:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The lighting in this picture appeals. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - The sky is very flat to me and the composition in general is good but not great, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too dark, although I'm sure the same image could be featured with a more appealing light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:42, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Info new version processed, hopefully it has a more appealing light now. --Trougnouf (talk) 10:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Bertha-von-Suttner-1906.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 22:58:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

I chose it because it is used in a important number of articles and pages. Ezarateesteban 16:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
That might make it a VI, but what's the argument for FP? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Good photo without scratches, artifacts and another issues Ezarateesteban 19:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
That reads like an argument for QI, if the photographer were a Commons user. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I know it but I like if anyone evaluate the quality of this picture Ezarateesteban 22:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak suppoert I took some time deciding this one. On the one hand, Bertha von Suttner is a very important historical figure, so the legitimacy of the nomination is beyond question. It's also a photo from 1906 (read that again, nineteen oh-freakin' six, it's over 100 years old!), so I think we can forgive the overall lack of sharpness. I just wish the resolution was higher, and I'm also not sure about the quality of the restoration. It looks OK compared to the original, but.. hmmmm..... Well, it's borderline, and I may be a bit taken with it since I basically live and breathe history. If anyone else out there want to have something to compare it to, in order to find the standard set for historical FPs, here they are.--Peulle (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment there's part of the border left at the bottom. I think the border should be either removed completely or not removed at all … --El Grafo (talk) 08:19, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  Done borderline removed Ezarateesteban 11:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Certainly VI and useful, not good enough for FP, even for a picture from 1906. --Yann (talk) 12:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Basilica Santa Maria della Salute Dorsoduro Venezia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 14:54:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support and 7.--Peulle (talk) 11:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Really good at full size, and I'm sure you'll work on the perspective thing Peulle mentions. I might prefer for the building on the far right to be included in full, but that's hardly an important criterion for voting on this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Such fine detail, and relaxing cool colors. Daniel Case (talk) 04:44, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:53, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I do not really like the shift to the left --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 07:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The resolution is outstanding, but the perspective isn't.It´s too close to the building and the viewing angle is too steep upwards to be favorable enough fo a FP. --Milseburg (talk) 16:01, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 14:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support Very high quality, but it really feels like the subject wants to be more centered or less centered.. — Rhododendrites talk |  16:27, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Aerial photographs of The Fullerton Hotel of Singapore at night.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 04:04:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very attractive. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose for a tripod shoot with ISO 125 surprising noisy (look e.g. at the white fassade). Overall a good fotography that doesn't thrill me. Beside of this: this image was obviously not taken from a public approachable place so we have no panorama of freedom here and I question the rightfulness of this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Freedom of panorama in Singapore is  OK for 3D objects and all the buildings, see this category. The noise is normal for a night shot and the resolution is high enough, compare for example with this FP shot from the same roof -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:08, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
    • I didn't say s.th. against the resolution. But the noise is not good, especially for such a camera like the 5D Mark IV. Read the definition of FoP carefully and you will see that this image doesn't fit in. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • This is not a definition for FoP, but an explanation. The location where this picture was taken from the observation deck of the Marina Bay Sands Hotel. The access to this point causes costs, is private ground of the hotel and therefore not a public place in the common definition. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • The existance of a category in Commons is not a valid proof. FoP means in many countries that your place, where you have taken the image, hast to be public. For sure you're able to show me the law of Singapure where this point is not relevant. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Singapore Copyright Act says in its Section 64 : "The copyright in a building or a model of a building is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the building or model or by the inclusion of the building or model in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast". You may read Wikipedia to learn more about the freedom of panorama, or ask the Village pump. Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Taxiarchos228: I think you are premising German FoP law here, which is indeed very restrictive. The relevant one, however, is COM:FOP#Singapore: there is no such limitation, that the camera location has to be as publicly accessible as the photographed building. --A.Savin 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
      Comment It is no aerial photo (not taken from an aircraft), I'm going to remove these categories now. --A.Savin 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan. And i don't see any problem with noise. Nice quality IMO. -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:34, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good composition, noise is OK, and light is very well managed (that's the most important issue). Yann (talk) 16:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 18:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A lack of noise --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:51, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I find no reason to hold back. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 07:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Sweet mangosteen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 04:08:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Concerning these raspberries and these blueberries I see a will for arrangement. This peaches are as boring as this candidate picture. I'm sorry, the image is a solide factual photography. But not outstanding in arrangement and has not an outstanding impact for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Aesthetically pleasing. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:22, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Good quality, nice arraignment but light could be better, it is a bit dull and makes the fruit look unattractive. --Cart (talk) 07:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support OK for me; more light would probably cause overexposed parts in the whites --Llez (talk) 14:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support - Good image; I like the contrast with the background. Something doesn't quite pop, or maybe I'm just jealous because I've long wanted to try fresh mangosteen, but they're just unavailable in the US. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  16:14, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - They are sometimes available in Chinatown, though they are smaller than Malaysian mangosteens and not as good. But even a mediocre mangosteen, as long as it's ripe, is delicious. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:56, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I read a while back that, at least at one point, it operated as kind of a black market in NYC's Chinatown, because they're illegal to import for some agricultural/pest reasons. Or at least illegal to import from the main places that grow them. There was a NYT or New Yorker article years ago about how locals could make a special request and some grocers would have a secret stash in the back. Possibly that ban has been lifted or enough other countries grow them and can send them over since then, though... — Rhododendrites talk |  17:11, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Read w:Purple mangosteen: "Without fumigation or irradiation (in order to kill the Asian fruit fly) fresh mangosteens were illegal to import into the United States until 2007." Now they're legal, but like I said, the ones you can get here are nowhere near as good as fresh Malaysian ones. But get a couple anyway when you can. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Rhododendrites: If mangosteens are difficult to find in the US, you really have to go to Asia or or any country where they're cultivated to taste them, it's going to be worth the trip :-) Honestly, they're very unique with delicious flavor, and easy to eat when they are ripe like that. Thanks for your vote and comment -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:45, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Mut (Maut, Mout).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 02:02:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the category here>]]
  •   Info created by Maksimsokolov - uploaded by Maksimsokolov - nominated by [[User:{{subst:Maksimsokolov}}|]] -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 02:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 02:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Possibly a QI, but not an FP because of distracting reflections on the left and a distracting message board on the right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:54, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:59, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan. --Peulle (talk) 10:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 01:19, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Downtown Toronto in September 2018 (Early Sunday Morning, frontal view from a kayak).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 01:55:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the category here>]]
  •   Info created by Maksimsokolov - uploaded by Maksimsokolov - nominated by [[User:{{subst: Maksimsokolov}}|]] -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 01:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 01:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Distracting foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - I have the sensation of being inundated by water, but I wasn't surprised when I saw that this is an iPhone pic - the quality is not good enough for FP and I think it would probably fail at QIC, too, though you could always try. Also, please try to find categories for your nominations. Look through the galleries at COM:FP and request help if you need it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose strong quality issues at the 100% view --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. Looks good as a thumbnail, so with a proper camera, this could probably have been featured.--Peulle (talk) 08:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. Nice view but a) we could do without the front of the kayak and b) we need a better camera. Daniel Case (talk) 23:41, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de la Virgen María, Breslavia, Polonia, 2017-12-20, DD 17-19 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 21:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  •   Info Main nave of the Virgin Mary church, Wrocław, Poland. Poco2 21:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco2 21:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:10, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral IMO it could be FP, but there are two issues. At the left is more space than at the right. May it is correct. The other is the gap at the tile at the bottom. IMO the gap should horizontal. --XRay talk 10:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    XRay: I haven't undrestood your second comment but just uploaded a new version with a tilt correction and perspective/crop adjustments to improve symmetry Poco2 19:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    I just added a note. (In deutsch: Die Fuge der Fliesen am unteren Rand ist schief. In den Kirchen ist diese aber in der Regel gerade. Naja, von Ausnahmen abgesehen.) --XRay talk 04:59, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild   Oppose - This is surely a good photo, but it doesn't feel quite like an FP to me in this rich category, partly because it lacks the pinpoint sharpness of some of the greatest FPs in this class and also partly because this interior itself is not as lovely as others, what with the not so interesting windows in the apse and also the grayish feel of the light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Brooms on an open market in Macedonia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 19:06:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Yolanda - uploaded by Kiril Simeonovski - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Interesting idea, and good for you for nominating something different, but for a couple of reasons it doesn't work. First, even given the fast shutter speed and slow ISO, the highlights at the top are still almost searing, and second, there are more broomheads than the image needs. Daniel Case (talk) 20:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose more or less per Daniel: Good idea, but not quite an FP in composition, nor in execution, as there is noise and CA in some of the shadows. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:33, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Mount Stuart House horoscope room 2018-08-25.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 12:42:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Large skipper (Ochlodes sylvanus) underside Sweden.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 11:14:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Thanks Llez, Helpful. In the UK we also call these flower beetles and it was correctly identified as Oedemera sp.. I have added 'false blister beetle' to description. Charles (talk) 08:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Nürnberg St. Lorenz Sakramentshaus 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 04:13:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  Info @Daniel Case: Well, it is a so-called sacrament house, a tower-like tabernacle of more than 20m height, fitted to the pillar of the church. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
It's not so much that I don't know what it's a picture of, it's that there's so many competing verticals in the image as to sufficiently distract from the subject. Daniel Case (talk) 20:49, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very special work. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it. High enzyclopedic value, very good technical work and nice to look at. What do you need more for a FP? The special ratio isn't a problem for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support as per Wladyslaw. Yann (talk) 03:42, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Is it just me or is it a bit distorted, especially visible at the top? — Rhododendrites talk |  16:17, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  Info @Rhododendrites: I suspect the curved shape of the very top of the sacrament house deceives you. Indeed, it almost touches the vaults of the church, then bends forward and down, like a spiral. If you mean something else, please give me a hint. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:16, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Hannover, die Marktkirche vanaf de Osterstrasse Dm IMG 4453 2018-07-01 09.56.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 17:36:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Thanks, yes I have already denoised the photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Please look at the pedestrian zone near to the person. There you can see a very noisy area. For me to noisy to be a FP. Very pitty because I like this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - I see what Wladyslaw is talking about, but I think it's a relatively minor issue in context and also like the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Dark and the composition doesn't work well for me. I'm maybe too classical in my tastes, but the combination of a shoe shop with a church looks a bit awkward to start with. I don't like the white building on the right because it has no charm and the harsh contrasts are not aesthetic. Also the signs on the left are not very elegant, so this shop is not attractive. But the main problem remains this street which is the way where the eyes want to go, while it is too dark -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:55, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile Morin. --The NMI User (talk) 09:49, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Like Basile, I have problems with the composition. My issue is not so much the darkness as that the signs up front conflict with the steeple in the back for recognition as the subject of this image. Daniel Case (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support even there are a few technical issues I like this view very much. The contrast between classical and modern (and maybe not so successful) architecture on both sides of the street is interessting. Also the contrast between the neon signs and the church is not a conflict but exciting and good in photographically sense. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:38, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support interessting composition --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 08:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Amrumer Windmühle (2018).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 14:28:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:2018L0765 - Saint-Malo.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 07:50:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment - I haven't, I do either color version or b&w. I haven't both version for any photo. --Myroslav Vydrak (talk) 07:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very well, then. I might like a brighter sky, but really, per Christian. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Wemyss Bay railway station concourse 2018-08-25 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2018 at 15:46:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:02, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Laitche (talk) 21:36, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Peulle (talk) 21:48, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:44, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:20, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 23:23, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:23, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 06:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:01, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:49, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support nice shot. Charles (talk) 19:33, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 03:16, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- -donald- (talk) 05:18, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --The NMI User (talk) 09:47, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:30, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Asymmetrical cut, obstructing signal traversed in the middle bottom, extreme distortion and blurred on the left bottom border --Photographer 01:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • This photo, as with many I took that day, was taken with my Samyang 10mm ultra wide-angle lens. It has an angle-of-view of 109.6° which is as far as you can reasonably take a rectilinear lens. This photo was taken with the camera pointing slightly up, to bring in more ceiling and less boring concrete floor, and then corrected afterwards in Lightroom. Unlike with my stitched photos, I'm far more restricted about where to crop and the sharpness is not as good, though I think still quite acceptable. I tried to position the camera in the middle to get pleasing symmetrical results, but it isn't perfect. One problem is the sign, which you can see in File:Wemyss Bay railway station concourse 2018-08-25 5.jpg (middle-left) and is bright red, white and yellow and very distracting if you saw that in the middle of the scene. I tried to position so it was edge-on and not catch the eye. It isn't the sort of sign I can just lift up and move out of the way, without getting arrested by the transport police :-). You can also see from that photo how the top of the ceiling in the photo has curved over towards me and is quite close. This will cause the wide-angle perspective distortion by magnifying, but I think here the straight lines of the roof don't look unpleasantly distorted. Other things like round windows and people tend to illustrate that distortion in a more uncomfortable manner. I agree it isn't a perfect photo and I'd have liked to have had the time to make a stitched panorama. -- Colin (talk) 07:39, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your rich explanation and, I understand what is your intention here, however, I think that this photo is not up to your previous work. I hope you can take my negative feedback as a stimulation to do better job (maybe in a combination of nodal ninja photos). Sincerely this place deserves a perfectionist work that you have accustomed us to appreciate and taste, with enormous size and majestic quality. Obviously my opinion about this photo is little shared, or simply people vote positively because we love you --Photographer 23:57, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
The Photographer, ha ha, I'm not sure about "love". I hope I've ruffled enough feathers with oppose votes and criticism that nobody should feel bad about giving me an oppose if warranted. I guess this is more similar to my fisheye photos than my stitched panorama photos. Or as a good photo of a great subject, rather than a great photo of a great subject, which would be ideal. I would love to go back and take a better shot but that's quite unlikely any time soon. I live 400 miles away, the weather is not always as good as this, and stations can be busy. -- Colin (talk) 07:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support a very strong symmetrical view may be classic but looks over time boring. A little bit asymmety brings the image alive. The other reasons for this picture are self-evident. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:33, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Exterior of the Castle of Valencay 24.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2018 at 22:56:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

alternativeEdit

 

  •   Info So maybe this one is better? Tournasol7 (talk) 07:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Much better, IMO, but too different to be an alternate. You could consider nominating that photo separately. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:37, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Agree this version is too different to be presented as an alt, but it certainly has its chances as a new nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:30, 19 September 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 09:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

秀逸除外候補Edit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:2018 - Château fort de Lourdes.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 09:23:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Exterior of the Castle of Valencay 31.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 07:07:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Close up of Maitreya Buddha at Thiksey Monastery DSCN6617 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 06:55:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Ice planet and antarctic jellyfish.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 00:29:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals#Class_:_Scyphozoa
  •   Info Diplulmaris antarctica jellyfish in Antarctica. One of the finalists in the Wiki Science Competition 2017. Created and uploaded by AMICE - nominated by Rhododendrites. — Rhododendrites talk |  00:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The detail on the jellyfish itself is nice, and I like the way the light field frames it. The filename should probably be moved away from "ice planet" since it's, well, technically inaccurate :) but that's sort of what it looks like. — Rhododendrites talk |  00:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Nice animal, but distracting blue light in the background, and I find the crop too large. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:33, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Physocarpus opulifolius.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2018 at 00:16:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Rialto Bridge at night2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 17:11:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support - Quite good. "Rialto bridge at night" is a sufficient description. As for geotagging, someone could do that, but we know where the Rialto Bridge is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Buste Hervé de Portzmoguer.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 16:50:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info Bust of the Breton sailor Hervé de Portzmoguer. He is known under the name of Primauget for having commanded the fleet during the battle of Saint-Mathieu. created by S. DÉNIEL - uploaded by S. DÉNIEL - nominated by S. DÉNIEL -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Technically 3200 ISO is far too noisy for this kind of static shot. The picture is not sharp. In low light a tripod is necessary -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
    • The tripod is forbidden in most museums. With these principles you limit diversity. What is the ISO limit number for a photo to be acceptable? --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 06:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Most photos simply can't be FPs. FPs are supposed to be among the very best photos on the site. Have you looked at COM:VIC? Even museum photos that are not great can be valuable, and if they're best in a particular scope that's deemed sufficiently notable (such as this sculpture probably would be), they can get the Valued Image designation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for these tips. What is the ISO limit number for a photo to be acceptable for you? --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 08:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I think it completely depends on the subject and the type of photography. Here some people will find your picture noisy at 125 ISO only because of their lack of enthusiasm for your subject, and sometimes they will forgive 1600 ISO or more since the situation is special, justified by some features (moving subject in a dark place, telephoto, etc.) -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile, might not be a QI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Teddy-Express.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 15:25:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 15:25, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question Absolutely charming :), but is there any chance of getting just a little bit more frame at the top? Just enough to get the top left little train signal not cut. I think that would also balance the photo better because of the empty space at the bottom between the tracks. Thoughts? --Cart (talk) 16:12, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
    •   Done --Llez (talk) 22:02, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Great, thanks. With the amount of guys here on this forum, I'm surprised we don't have any FP's of model trains (AFAICS). Think of the challenge to make it appear like a real train in a Kabelleger-esque photo. --Cart (talk) 22:47, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:29, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:De Lelie and De Ster view from Island.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 14:26:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:ISS-43 Deploying of CubeSats.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 13:50:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Space exploration#Spacecraft in orbit
  •   Info created by NASA - uploaded by Ras67 - nominated by Msaynevirta -- Msaynevirta (talk) 13:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Msaynevirta (talk) 13:50, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It's a 'no' from me for two reasons: firstly, I'm not really wowed by what I'm looking at; the subject is not very clear, certainly nowhere near some of the other impressive shots from NASA; shots of planets, stars and such. Secondly, the image quality is not FP level - there's a glare coming from the highlights, the sharpness is sub-par and the resolution is not very high either.--Peulle (talk) 16:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 22:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Composition is a bit empty and I'm not impressed by the quality at full size -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:WLE - 2018 - Parc national des Pyrenees - Cirque de Gavarnie - 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 13:30:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France
  •   Info created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Moahim -- Moahim (talk) 13:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Moahim (talk) 13:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support very nice mood --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:08, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Martin. Not easy to get a stream centered and still get the "accent subject" at 1/3. --Cart (talk) 16:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportRhododendrites talk |  16:23, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Yes, this is quite beautiful. Is this the full-sized photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:51, 21 September 2018 (UTC) - It is crop from the larger pano (there were a bit of superfluous information), so it has such size --Moahim (talk) 05:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - OK, thank you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:42, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:PushkinGory asv2018-07 img05 Mikhailovskoe.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 12:45:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Javier shows part of the grape harvest in his Lysekil vineyard 1 - cropped.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 00:39:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
  •   Info No, I haven't been out travelling I'm sorry to say. This is from the harvest in a vineyard/winery right up here in the cold north. After having documented the harvest at the vineyard, this photo stuck with me as a more vivid way of presenting the grapes-soon-to-be-wine, in the hands of the farmer himself instead of arranged on a plate or something. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cart (talk) 00:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Now for something completely different. :) --Peulle (talk) 07:01, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Composition. Charles (talk) 08:26, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it. IMO nothing wrong with the composition--A.Savin 12:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:23, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Yes, different. I like the different shades of green. Are the Solaris grapes he's holding similar to Chardonnay? They look similar. Daniel Case (talk) 14:40, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, I'm rather ignorant when it comes to grapes, other than that they and their products are tasty. I only learned that Javier chose Solaris since they are hardy and can survive in this climate. --Cart (talk) 15:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
@W.carter: Yes, that's what the article says, but not its Swedish counterpart yet unfortunately. But both of them do explain how it was bred, and it appears the dark spots are really just a coincidence as there is absolutely no Chardonnay in their ancestry. Daniel Case (talk) 02:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Composition! How long did it take you to move the farmers fingers to the right direction that they started to make a pleasing form? Also, any other colour of the farmer's T-shirt would spoil it but it seems like he was carefully choosing the right green gradient until he found the right fit for the color of the grass and the grapes. --Podzemnik (talk) 14:51, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You are right on both accounts. :) I did manhandle the poor guy a bit to get the photo as good as I could. The hardest part was getting him in position so that the angle of the light became just right for the grapes. At first he was a bit annoyed with me taking up time from the harvest, but he brightened considerably when he realized he was also getting free photos of his vineyard to use. I was extremely lucky that he had such a fashion sense, any other shirt and the photo would have been ruined. But that is what photography so often is about: luck, the color of a shirt, a cloud or a ray of light in the right place. Things you can't control, only do your darnedest to capture when you see them. --Cart (talk) 15:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   SupportRhododendrites talk |  16:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:07, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Green shirt (and green background), and something different, per Peulle and Podzemnik -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A photo report is good for diversity here. --S. DÉNIEL
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 09:42, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Lužice, zatáčka.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 19:45:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info created by Aktron - uploaded by Aktron - nominated by T.Bednarz -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:45, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Question - T.Bednarz, would you like to give an explanation of how you find this one of the best photos on Commons? I'm not seeing it, but I'd like to see an argument, if possible, before I vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm not satisfied that the technical quality here is high enough to reach featured status. Also, while the composition is nice enough, I'm not really blown away - there's no big "wow" factor.--Peulle (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not bad as thumbnail but disappointing at full size. Not sharp and there's also chromatic aberration. It would be okay with a better quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:37, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Under the right circumstances this could make a great roadscape. These aren't them. Daniel Case (talk) 14:35, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Félix, Torralba de Ribota, Zaragoza, España, 2018-04-04, DD 51-53 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 18:06:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Juvenile Nubian ibex (50822).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 09:20:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • @Ikan Kekek: It's small because as soon as I got closer, they ran off (I'm clumsier than they are in a rocky desert), and that's the longest focal length I had/have available to me (150mm, equivalent to 300mm full frame). — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Yes, very small and the lighting not so good. A bit soft. 1/1600 sec/F5.6 not a good choice for a static scene. Charles (talk) 11:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • If it were a situation when I could've used a tripod vs. freehandling at 150mm (equivalent to 300mm full frame) on rocky ground, I'd agree re: shutter. Perhaps I could've brought it down a little bit from 1/1600 and still be safe, but it was just shortly before I left the desert and the only time I saw kids together like this, nevermind close enough to photograph, so wanted to be safe because there was no shortage of light and they were just so cute :). Maybe a noob move, meh. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not all all 'Noob'. But only a few images aspire to FP! Charles (talk) 16:46, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose For me there's no to ways about it; it's not an FP for the reasons stated above.--Peulle (talk) 14:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support overall I was happy with the result of this one, though I understand why some would oppose given the size of it. I do wish I could've gotten closer without scaring them or for different conditions. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Maybe I'm too much of a softy, but although this photo is small, it's well composed and I find it touching. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:14, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support, lighting isn't all that special and a little bokeh would be good, but I guess under the circumstances presented above this was the best shot possible. Good composition as well. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Moderate support It's not the greatest it could be. But it doesn't have too many too obvious shortcomings for a picture by someone who doesn't usually take wildlife photos and just tried to make the best of a shot that presented itself and was unlikely to last. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 17:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:30, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Streitberg Freibad 7023683.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2018 at 06:27:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • User:Ermell, what do you think? Is it oversaturated? I figured that that's how it actually looked, because of the light at that time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Ikan and Cart are right, saturation was not added. I just changed the profile to Adobe strong. After bathing and just before sunset, the light and colours were essentially the same as they are shown here. Thanks for nominating Ikan.--Ermell (talk) 20:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You're welcome. I think it's an interesting shot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't know, only a bad perception. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Looking at a lawn in a photo is usually a good way of judging if it is oversaturated. The grass here is almost dull (compaired to the church nom below) so I don't see any signs of oversaturation. --Cart (talk) 09:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • You have seen this church: so, you know, saturation (in general) is not necessarily a problem for me. it's just a comment. What is your opinion, you voting for?--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • On this forum. we can make observations and comments without voting. --Cart (talk) 13:20, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it. :) The combination of strong red and blue colours with intermittent whites, the composition with the mirror effect and the general curves of the subject are enough for me to overlook any smaller issues with depth, noise or saturation. I also think it's quite cool how the divider in the water is also red and white.--Peulle (talk) 14:12, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support I like it, but I think it would be even stronger cropped to the slides. However, that might make it too small for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Ermell (talk) 20:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:21, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - The colors make me think of a real-life David Hockney painting — Rhododendrites talk |  16:10, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Tozina (talk) 18:31, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Lincoln Cathedral Chapter House.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 12:22:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Dülmen, Privatrösterei Schröer, Kaffeebehälter -- 2018 -- 0529.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2018 at 10:31:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others_2
  •   Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 10:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- XRay talk 10:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I know it's an effect, but I feel like the DoF is a bit too shallow here; even the closest container is not entirely in focus.--Peulle (talk) 11:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 03:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Current DoF works for me. --Rbrechko (talk) 20:50, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Works for me too. --Cart (talk) 07:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 14:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice colors and composition, and per Rbrechko. It reminds me this -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Musée L during civil twilight (Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, DSCF4200).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 23:32:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Belgium
  •   Info "It has so many pretty lines everywhere! And I feel like it evokes a story with the lights and the things poking through the windows. :)" - User:Bubblenymph, by User:Trougnouf
  •   Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 23:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose lighting does not appeal. Charles (talk) 08:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Charles --Milseburg (talk) 13:34, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Charles; just doesn't stand out for me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:39, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Cool lines and soft light :) - Benh (talk) 21:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support The lighting in this picture appeals. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:18, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - The sky is very flat to me and the composition in general is good but not great, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too dark, although I'm sure the same image could be featured with a more appealing light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:42, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Info new version processed, hopefully it has a more appealing light now. --Trougnouf (talk) 10:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Bertha-von-Suttner-1906.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 22:58:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

I chose it because it is used in a important number of articles and pages. Ezarateesteban 16:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
That might make it a VI, but what's the argument for FP? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Good photo without scratches, artifacts and another issues Ezarateesteban 19:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
That reads like an argument for QI, if the photographer were a Commons user. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I know it but I like if anyone evaluate the quality of this picture Ezarateesteban 22:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak suppoert I took some time deciding this one. On the one hand, Bertha von Suttner is a very important historical figure, so the legitimacy of the nomination is beyond question. It's also a photo from 1906 (read that again, nineteen oh-freakin' six, it's over 100 years old!), so I think we can forgive the overall lack of sharpness. I just wish the resolution was higher, and I'm also not sure about the quality of the restoration. It looks OK compared to the original, but.. hmmmm..... Well, it's borderline, and I may be a bit taken with it since I basically live and breathe history. If anyone else out there want to have something to compare it to, in order to find the standard set for historical FPs, here they are.--Peulle (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment there's part of the border left at the bottom. I think the border should be either removed completely or not removed at all … --El Grafo (talk) 08:19, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  Done borderline removed Ezarateesteban 11:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Certainly VI and useful, not good enough for FP, even for a picture from 1906. --Yann (talk) 12:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Basilica Santa Maria della Salute Dorsoduro Venezia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 14:54:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support and 7.--Peulle (talk) 11:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Really good at full size, and I'm sure you'll work on the perspective thing Peulle mentions. I might prefer for the building on the far right to be included in full, but that's hardly an important criterion for voting on this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Such fine detail, and relaxing cool colors. Daniel Case (talk) 04:44, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:53, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I do not really like the shift to the left --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 07:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The resolution is outstanding, but the perspective isn't.It´s too close to the building and the viewing angle is too steep upwards to be favorable enough fo a FP. --Milseburg (talk) 16:01, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Podzemnik (talk) 14:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support Very high quality, but it really feels like the subject wants to be more centered or less centered.. — Rhododendrites talk |  16:27, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Aerial photographs of The Fullerton Hotel of Singapore at night.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 04:04:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very attractive. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose for a tripod shoot with ISO 125 surprising noisy (look e.g. at the white fassade). Overall a good fotography that doesn't thrill me. Beside of this: this image was obviously not taken from a public approachable place so we have no panorama of freedom here and I question the rightfulness of this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Freedom of panorama in Singapore is  OK for 3D objects and all the buildings, see this category. The noise is normal for a night shot and the resolution is high enough, compare for example with this FP shot from the same roof -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:08, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
    • I didn't say s.th. against the resolution. But the noise is not good, especially for such a camera like the 5D Mark IV. Read the definition of FoP carefully and you will see that this image doesn't fit in. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • This is not a definition for FoP, but an explanation. The location where this picture was taken from the observation deck of the Marina Bay Sands Hotel. The access to this point causes costs, is private ground of the hotel and therefore not a public place in the common definition. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • The existance of a category in Commons is not a valid proof. FoP means in many countries that your place, where you have taken the image, hast to be public. For sure you're able to show me the law of Singapure where this point is not relevant. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:48, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Singapore Copyright Act says in its Section 64 : "The copyright in a building or a model of a building is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the building or model or by the inclusion of the building or model in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast". You may read Wikipedia to learn more about the freedom of panorama, or ask the Village pump. Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Taxiarchos228: I think you are premising German FoP law here, which is indeed very restrictive. The relevant one, however, is COM:FOP#Singapore: there is no such limitation, that the camera location has to be as publicly accessible as the photographed building. --A.Savin 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
      Comment It is no aerial photo (not taken from an aircraft), I'm going to remove these categories now. --A.Savin 11:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan. And i don't see any problem with noise. Nice quality IMO. -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:34, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good composition, noise is OK, and light is very well managed (that's the most important issue). Yann (talk) 16:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 18:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:36, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support A lack of noise --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:51, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I find no reason to hold back. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cart (talk) 07:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Sweet mangosteen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 04:08:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Concerning these raspberries and these blueberries I see a will for arrangement. This peaches are as boring as this candidate picture. I'm sorry, the image is a solide factual photography. But not outstanding in arrangement and has not an outstanding impact for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Aesthetically pleasing. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:22, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Good quality, nice arraignment but light could be better, it is a bit dull and makes the fruit look unattractive. --Cart (talk) 07:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support OK for me; more light would probably cause overexposed parts in the whites --Llez (talk) 14:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   weak support - Good image; I like the contrast with the background. Something doesn't quite pop, or maybe I'm just jealous because I've long wanted to try fresh mangosteen, but they're just unavailable in the US. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  16:14, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - They are sometimes available in Chinatown, though they are smaller than Malaysian mangosteens and not as good. But even a mediocre mangosteen, as long as it's ripe, is delicious. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:56, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I read a while back that, at least at one point, it operated as kind of a black market in NYC's Chinatown, because they're illegal to import for some agricultural/pest reasons. Or at least illegal to import from the main places that grow them. There was a NYT or New Yorker article years ago about how locals could make a special request and some grocers would have a secret stash in the back. Possibly that ban has been lifted or enough other countries grow them and can send them over since then, though... — Rhododendrites talk |  17:11, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Read w:Purple mangosteen: "Without fumigation or irradiation (in order to kill the Asian fruit fly) fresh mangosteens were illegal to import into the United States until 2007." Now they're legal, but like I said, the ones you can get here are nowhere near as good as fresh Malaysian ones. But get a couple anyway when you can. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Rhododendrites: If mangosteens are difficult to find in the US, you really have to go to Asia or or any country where they're cultivated to taste them, it's going to be worth the trip :-) Honestly, they're very unique with delicious flavor, and easy to eat when they are ripe like that. Thanks for your vote and comment -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:45, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Mut (Maut, Mout).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 02:02:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the category here>]]
  •   Info created by Maksimsokolov - uploaded by Maksimsokolov - nominated by [[User:{{subst:Maksimsokolov}}|]] -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 02:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 02:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Possibly a QI, but not an FP because of distracting reflections on the left and a distracting message board on the right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:54, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:59, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan. --Peulle (talk) 10:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 01:19, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Downtown Toronto in September 2018 (Early Sunday Morning, frontal view from a kayak).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2018 at 01:55:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the category here>]]
  •   Info created by Maksimsokolov - uploaded by Maksimsokolov - nominated by [[User:{{subst: Maksimsokolov}}|]] -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 01:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Maksimsokolov (talk) 01:55, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Distracting foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - I have the sensation of being inundated by water, but I wasn't surprised when I saw that this is an iPhone pic - the quality is not good enough for FP and I think it would probably fail at QIC, too, though you could always try. Also, please try to find categories for your nominations. Look through the galleries at COM:FP and request help if you need it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose strong quality issues at the 100% view --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:51, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. Looks good as a thumbnail, so with a proper camera, this could probably have been featured.--Peulle (talk) 08:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. Nice view but a) we could do without the front of the kayak and b) we need a better camera. Daniel Case (talk) 23:41, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de la Virgen María, Breslavia, Polonia, 2017-12-20, DD 17-19 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 21:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  •   Info Main nave of the Virgin Mary church, Wrocław, Poland. Poco2 21:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco2 21:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:10, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Neutral IMO it could be FP, but there are two issues. At the left is more space than at the right. May it is correct. The other is the gap at the tile at the bottom. IMO the gap should horizontal. --XRay talk 10:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    XRay: I haven't undrestood your second comment but just uploaded a new version with a tilt correction and perspective/crop adjustments to improve symmetry Poco2 19:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
    I just added a note. (In deutsch: Die Fuge der Fliesen am unteren Rand ist schief. In den Kirchen ist diese aber in der Regel gerade. Naja, von Ausnahmen abgesehen.) --XRay talk 04:59, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild   Oppose - This is surely a good photo, but it doesn't feel quite like an FP to me in this rich category, partly because it lacks the pinpoint sharpness of some of the greatest FPs in this class and also partly because this interior itself is not as lovely as others, what with the not so interesting windows in the apse and also the grayish feel of the light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:37, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Brooms on an open market in Macedonia.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 19:06:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Yolanda - uploaded by Kiril Simeonovski - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Interesting idea, and good for you for nominating something different, but for a couple of reasons it doesn't work. First, even given the fast shutter speed and slow ISO, the highlights at the top are still almost searing, and second, there are more broomheads than the image needs. Daniel Case (talk) 20:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:29, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose more or less per Daniel: Good idea, but not quite an FP in composition, nor in execution, as there is noise and CA in some of the shadows. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:33, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Mount Stuart House horoscope room 2018-08-25.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 12:42:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Large skipper (Ochlodes sylvanus) underside Sweden.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 11:14:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Thanks Llez, Helpful. In the UK we also call these flower beetles and it was correctly identified as Oedemera sp.. I have added 'false blister beetle' to description. Charles (talk) 08:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Nürnberg St. Lorenz Sakramentshaus 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 04:13:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  Info @Daniel Case: Well, it is a so-called sacrament house, a tower-like tabernacle of more than 20m height, fitted to the pillar of the church. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
It's not so much that I don't know what it's a picture of, it's that there's so many competing verticals in the image as to sufficiently distract from the subject. Daniel Case (talk) 20:49, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Very special work. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it. High enzyclopedic value, very good technical work and nice to look at. What do you need more for a FP? The special ratio isn't a problem for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support as per Wladyslaw. Yann (talk) 03:42, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Is it just me or is it a bit distorted, especially visible at the top? — Rhododendrites talk |  16:17, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
  Info @Rhododendrites: I suspect the curved shape of the very top of the sacrament house deceives you. Indeed, it almost touches the vaults of the church, then bends forward and down, like a spiral. If you mean something else, please give me a hint. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:16, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Hannover, die Marktkirche vanaf de Osterstrasse Dm IMG 4453 2018-07-01 09.56.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 17:36:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Thanks, yes I have already denoised the photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Please look at the pedestrian zone near to the person. There you can see a very noisy area. For me to noisy to be a FP. Very pitty because I like this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - I see what Wladyslaw is talking about, but I think it's a relatively minor issue in context and also like the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Dark and the composition doesn't work well for me. I'm maybe too classical in my tastes, but the combination of a shoe shop with a church looks a bit awkward to start with. I don't like the white building on the right because it has no charm and the harsh contrasts are not aesthetic. Also the signs on the left are not very elegant, so this shop is not attractive. But the main problem remains this street which is the way where the eyes want to go, while it is too dark -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:55, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile Morin. --The NMI User (talk) 09:49, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Like Basile, I have problems with the composition. My issue is not so much the darkness as that the signs up front conflict with the steeple in the back for recognition as the subject of this image. Daniel Case (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support even there are a few technical issues I like this view very much. The contrast between classical and modern (and maybe not so successful) architecture on both sides of the street is interessting. Also the contrast between the neon signs and the church is not a conflict but exciting and good in photographically sense. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:38, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support interessting composition --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 08:40, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Amrumer Windmühle (2018).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 14:28:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:2018L0765 - Saint-Malo.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 07:50:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment - I haven't, I do either color version or b&w. I haven't both version for any photo. --Myroslav Vydrak (talk) 07:56, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very well, then. I might like a brighter sky, but really, per Christian. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Wemyss Bay railway station concourse 2018-08-25 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2018 at 15:46:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.